YER SUMNER, Employee/Appellant,
v.
JIM LUPIENT INFINITI and SFM RISK SOLUTIONS, INC., Employer-Insurer/Respondents.
No. WC19-6242
Minnesota Workers Compensation
Workers' Compensation Court of Appeals
June 19, 2019
ATTORNEY
FEES - RORAFF FEES. The compensation judge
appropriately applied the Irwin factors to reach a
reasonable Roraff fee.
B.J.
Robichaud, Paul W. Schroepfer, and Samuel H. Dilley,
Robichaud, Schroepfer & Correia, P.A., P.S.C.,
Minneapolis, Minnesota, for the Appellant.
Joshua
M. Steinbrecher, Heacox, Hartman, Koshmrl, Cosgriff, Johnson,
Lane & Feenstra, PA., St. Paul, Minnesota, for the
Respondents.
Determined by: Patricia J. Mlun, Chief Judge, David A.
Stofferahn, Judge, Gary M. Hall, Judge.
Compensation Judge: Adam S. Wolkoff
Affirmed.
OPINION
PATRICIA J. MILUN, Chief Judge.
The
employee appeals the amount of the compensation judge’s
award of Roraff attorney fees. We affirm.
BACKGROUND
On
January 28, 2012, Yer Sumner, the employee, was working as an
internet sales director of automotive sales for Jim Lupient
Infiniti, the employer, which was insured for workers’
compensation liability by SFM Risk Solutions. The employee
claimed that she slipped and fell that day while working on
the employer’s outdoor premises, striking her head,
left elbow, and back. The employee reported the incident to
her supervisor and continued working. Later, she sought
treatment for pain, dizziness, and confusion. The employee
filed a claim petition seeking temporary total disability
benefits (TTD) and payment of medical expenses. The employer
and insurer denied primary liability. Several providers
intervened.
The
compensation judge found that the employee had sustained a
work injury and was TTD from January 28 through February 11,
2012. The judge also found that the employee had fully
recovered from her work injury without the need for work
restrictions or further treatment and with no residual
disability by May 21, 2012. Holding that none of the
intervenors’ rights to reimbursement were otherwise
established prior to the hearing, the judge denied all the
intervenors’ claims for reimbursement due to their
failure to personally attend the hearing.
The
employee appealed the compensation judge’s finding that
the employee had recovered from her work injury by May 21,
2012; the denial of TTD benefits after February 11, 2012; the
failure to determine whether certain medical treatment was
reasonable, necessary, and causally related to the work
injury; and the denial of reimbursement to intervenors. Two
intervenors cross-appealed the denial of their claims for
reimbursement.
...